The "Buffian" method, as you requested....

[jimholcomb]

OK "buff" here it is........

"I submit my idea of the Poseidon reg. second stage replacement to be forwarded to George Irvine by any of those in the DIR loop. I just want it refered to as the "Buffian" method"

As you requested here is your reponse from George himself:

"From: "George Irvine" <girvine@bellsouth.net>
To: "Jim Holcomb" <jimholcomb@x-divers.com>, <trey@netdor.com>
Subject: RE: Private email
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 21:05:48 -0500
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
Importance: Normal


We only use gear that works in all situations. We do not use regs that blow in water when you scooter or in an current ( odin), we do not use regs that are upstream valves ( odin) , we do not use regs that need custom hoses ( odin) we do not use regs that fill with water if you try to pass them ( odin), we do not use regs that require an opv ( odin), we do no use regs that ridiculously constructed inner workings ( odin) , and yes, we do not use regs that can not be cleared underwater."




Now, just so there's no misunderstanding, I did not know the answer to the question and followed your request and asked GI3 himself. He answered me promptly with no attitude. I have NEVER dove with George in person. I'm not a member of the WKPP nor have I any interest in Halcyon or GUE. BUT I have found
that any questions I have ever asked him he has answered promptly and privately if that is the way I presented the question.

 

[The Chairman]

I like their first stages, but I have to agree with George on the Seconds... too finicky.

I wonder what he thinks about the Micra...???

 

[Uncle Pug]

Pete,
If you are really going to ask George about your micra....
Can I watch?

 

[buff]

the term "ridiculously constructed inner workings" doesn't qualify as "attitude"? I hope their equipment works well for them and they never loose a life in their "scientific exploration"

Well, here's my standard response. From Matthew Percival who runs a course at the Bethesda Naval Hospital.

<<Failure of upstream design:>>
OK, first let's get something straight. The Odin is not an upstream design! It's a tilt valve. While tilt valves are technically classified as a TYPE of upstream design, the distinction is EXTREMELY important. The idea that a down-stream design is inherently 'safe' is classic ignorance. Yes, I dive with a down-stream regulator (Cyclon) but I know and accept the limitation. People think they are safer with the down-stream because it eliminates the 'broken spring' problem. OK, so it does, but without the actuating arm, the down-stream regulator is a paper weight. Open your down-stream regulator underwater to clean it out (or whatever annual maintenance the DIR guys are doing underwater) and break or bend an actuating arm and you are essentially toast. Enter the tilt valve. Probably the safest design ever introduced. They pretty much can't fail. There aren't enough moving parts to fail. Your actuating arm (and spring) ARE the tilt valve. I could go into this at length.


Service issues:
By far the biggest problems I've seen with Poseidon service issues have been 'teckies' servicing their own regulators or worse yet, crappy dive shops. And there are far too many crappy dive shops.

If you ask me, Poseidon regulators are extremely simple to work on. But a teckie banging on it with a hammer and monkey wrench can render it useless in a matter of minutes. So can a dive shop bench guy who doesn't know what he's doing. But what does this have to do with Poseidon??? I've seen the same thing with Scuba Pro, Oceanic, Apeks, et.al. About the only regulator that is the same whether a monkey works on it or Einstein is a Sherwood Brut. But I don't foresee the DIR guys trading in for those anytime soon.

<<Cracking the valve too fast will result in the seat getting slammed >>
What seat??? In an Odin??? Does he mean the HP seat? Because the Odin doesn't have a LP seat. And Poseidon has the most forgiving HP seat out there. A poseidon HP seat could last 30 years if someone doesn't stick a pencil down in there trying to get it out!

High IPs:
Yes, the Cyclon has a high intermediate pressure. Why? They were designed that way. That's how they work best. I've heard such nonsense as this will cause unnecessary wear on the low pressure seat. Hah! I like that one, a high IP blowing down-stream INTO a low pressure seat will cause it to wear out. How the high IP manages to get behind the LP seat and push it backwards into the valve seat, I have no idea, but it sure sounds good. The only problem a high IP will cause is wearing out a crappy octopus that is not designed for a high IP. That's it.

I particularly like the argument about clearing an Odin. You have to tilt your head to clear it; and somehow this presents a safety issue. Oh, boy... I had to catch myself after that one. I still have a tear in my eye. I love teckies... they argue about the most minute equipment difference, but they can't clear a regulator. Have him come out to one of my Open Water I classes. I'll teach him how to clear a regulator so this won't be a problem for him.

And finally, let address something that exemplifies this person's complete lack of understanding of regulators.
<<Why buy a touchy, costly, decade-old design>>

OK, the Poseidon design is about 6 decades old.

<<There is a lot to be said for simplicity of design and Poseidons are anything but.>>

Ohh, boy... another tear in my eye. Not only are Poseidons older than virtually any other regulator out there, the design has not changed since day one. That's about as simple as a design can get. I believe I mentioned to you before, I bought a 50-year old Poseidon regulator (Cyclon style) and rebuilt it with standard parts. The hardest time I had with it was polishing the chrome! And yes, it breathes like a champ. Everyone else I know with an old regulator has it mounted on a wall. I dive with the Poseidon.

I don't know why Poseidon gets such a hard time. It makes no sense to me. I wouldn't dive if I had to dive with a traditional front-purge second stage. Why would anyone (especially teckies) want to dive with a regulator that literally changes its sensitivity based on how fast you are swimming? I've never understood that. Or tuning knobs for that matter.

Entertaining... quite entertaining.

Be safe... and go breathe upside-down just because you can!

 

[jimholcomb]

I'm not going to be a proxy debater between GI3 and this Matthew character. You wanted to know why on the reg and I found out for you. I don't care one way or another nor am I knowledgable enough about those regs to carry on an intelligent discussion. Now is there any other questions you might have that you already have a prefabricated answer to the response???

 

[Rick Murchison]

"this Matthew character"
"ridiculously constructed inner workings"
If you can't argue your point, attack the other party. The tactic is, unfortunately, often effective. But it isn't science, and it isn't real.
And it lends nothing to the credibility of "DIR."
Try to resist it, and just stick to the facts.
Rick

 

[jimholcomb]

Originally posted by Rick Murchison
"this Matthew character"
"ridiculously constructed inner workings"
If you can't argue your point, attack the other party. The tactic is, unfortunately, often effective. But it isn't science, and it isn't real.
And it lends nothing to the credibility of "DIR."
Try to resist it, and just stick to the facts.
Rick

Are you referring to me?????? I haven't attacked anybody. And what point would you have me argue? There are three or four threads going right now that are all hung up on the NAME!! Or an ATTITUDE!!

I tell you what, Rick. Tell me a little about YOUR philosophy. What parts are adopted from DIR, What parts are not, Why? I'm open minded enough to try something else out if it sounds reasoned. And leave the name crap out. Forget that it's called DIR - Forget the word "stroke" (which, incidently, I don't use) - Forget about the attitude. Just tell me what you agree with and disagree with. Tell me the things you don't feel are applicable to your type of diving. We can discuss THAT! Who knows? You might be right!! But keep the playground BS out of it.

You will find that I don't discuss anything that I don't have PERSONAL experience with and I don't try to "convert the sinners"!

 

[Rick Murchison]

Originally posted by jimholcomb


Are you referring to me?????? I haven't attacked anybody. And what point would you have me argue? There are three or four threads going right now that are all hung up on the NAME!! Or an ATTITUDE!!

I tell you what, Rick. Tell me a little about YOUR philosophy. What parts are adopted from DIR, What parts are not, Why? I'm open minded enough to try something else out if it sounds reasoned. And leave the name crap out. Forget that it's called DIR - Forget the word "stroke" (which, incidently, I don't use) - Forget about the attitude. Just tell me what you agree with and disagree with. Tell me the things you don't feel are applicable to your type of diving. We can discuss THAT! Who knows? You might be right!! But keep the playground BS out of it.

You will find that I don't discuss anything that I don't have PERSONAL experience with and I don't try to "convert the sinners"!

Nope. I don't know you from Adam. I am referring to what you [or someone using your moniker - ye never can tell on the internet] wrote. The "this Matthew character" remark is certainly not neutral - nor is the "playground BS" remark. Both are laden with emotion and without empirical substance.
For my views on DIR please see
http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6729
http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6508
I do not dislike DIR as a diving philosophy. I do dislike the dinigration and/or negative characterization of those whose application of the DIR philosophy results in configurations or procedures not in step with GI3. I do think there is a much broader acceptable variance in safe gear configurations than is usually endorsed by those who claim to be "DIR." And I do think that the optimal gear configuration for a particlular dive, expecially recreational "fun" dives, is rarely the configuration commonly known as "DIR."
Rick

 

[jimholcomb]

Originally posted by Rick Murchison

Nope. I don't know you from Adam. I am referring to what you [or someone using your moniker - ye never can tell on the internet] wrote. The "this Matthew character" remark is certainly not neutral - nor is the "playground BS" remark. Both are laden with emotion and without empirical substance.
For my views on DIR please see
http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6729
http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6508
I do not dislike DIR as a diving philosophy. I do dislike the dinigration and/or negative characterization of those whose application of the DIR philosophy results in configurations or procedures not in step with GI3. I do think there is a much broader acceptable variance in safe gear configurations than is usually endorsed by those who claim to be "DIR." And I do think that the optimal gear configuration for a particlular dive, expecially recreational "fun" dives, is rarely the configuration commonly known as "DIR."
Rick

I re-read all your posts referred to above and came to these conclusions:

You believe that the DIR configuration is not really all that much safer on a 20' reef than your current rig and DIR under these conditions may be a little over kill.

Standardized mixes - neutral (or no opinion)
Standardized marking - neutral (or no opinion)
Fitness - neutral (or no opinion)
Deep air - neutral (or no opinion)
Solo Diving - neutral (or no opinion)
Not diving with someone with an unsafe attitude (as you define "unsafe") - You agree

If I am incorrect on any of these assumptions, my apologies in advance.

Now, if I am correct in my assumptions, we only have one issue to discuss - the recreational applications of the DIR configuration.

And here's the kicker - I agree with most of what you say on this topic. I have no problem diving with anyone configured with a BC and the such on a 20' reef. I see absolutely no problem with strapping on the computer - I do! I don't think they should use it as a crutch like so many do - but I don't have any issues with it's use on a dive of this nature. My problem is diving with someone who CHANGES their configuration from technical to recreational. I strongly believe that a conditioned response and familiarity in an emergency situation will save your life. When the only air you've got is in your lungs every second counts.
Personally, I dive the same configuration through out all my diving - I just add and subtract equipment to meet the requirements of the dive at hand. But we have to face something,
a vast majority of divers never dive past 50 or 60 feet. Is the gear that they use safe? Of course it is. Do I feel my configuration is safer? Yes, I do. But so what? I don't make anyone else dive it NOR do I ridicule anyone soley on their gear choices.

Now this post is a discussion of one issue based on my assumptions.